About storms, climate, fools, and ( yes) Senator Inhofe Again


            Abe Lincoln put it this way:

            “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

            How wonderfully Abe’s words apply to that marvel of Senatorial sagacity, James M. Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican

            Surely you remember Mr. Inhofe?

He’s the Senate’s star climate change doubter and oil industry robot who claims climate change is a hoax. He calls climate scientists “conspirators.”

             Mr. Inhofe’s latest stunner came following the tragic tornado in Moore, a suburban town in the Senator’s home state.

             Because the Senator had orated against spending $50 billion in emergency funding for victims of Hurricane sandy, reporters asked if he would back such funding for Oklahoma’s victims. He said he would because:

 “That [Sandy relief spending] was totally different…. Everybody was getting in and exploiting the tragedy that took place.  That won’t happen in Oklahoma.”

            In other words, Oklahomans are more virtuous than New Yorkers, New Jerseyites, and other East Coast victims.

            That aside, Inhofe at least condescended to help the victims. The other Oklahoma Senator, Republican Tom Coburn, opposed emergency relief unless the expenditure was offset by cuts in other federal spending.

            There seems to be total denial among climate change deniers that emergency funding is likely to become even more common than it is. Not because of rip offs—though rip offs there may be—but because the rise in global temperatures warms the seas and generates more vicious storms.

            Of course, regardless of scientific studies and observable facts, Senator Inhofe and his ilk will remain unconvinced. As Benjamin Franklin observed, “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.”

            Even so, there is more and more reason to be convinced.  Reporting on a recent report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA Today’s Doyle Rice wrote:

            “Global warming has already doubled the chance of storms like Katrina, according to the study, which was led by climate scientist Aslak Grinstsed of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.”

            The cheering news is that the number of climate change disbelievers has dwindled. The Yale Project on Climate Change Communication reports that between 2010 and 2012 the number of doubters dropped from 16 percent of the American population to 8 percent. At the same time the number of Americans ”alarmed” by climate change has climbed ten percent.

            Overall 63 percent of Americans believe in climate change and its effects, and the Yalies report that those who believe in global warming, “are more certain of their convictions than those who do not.”

            It’s not clear that Senator Inhofe was counted among those less certain “deniers.” Probably not. And given his coziness with Big Oil, he’s unlikely to waver especially since, as Yale studies indicate:

             “Half or more [of climate change believers] favor the elimination of subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, and oppose the elimination of subsidies to renewable energy companies.”

            As many see it, only a fool would oppose subsidizing renewable energy companies given the facts about the rise of carbon dioxide caused by fossil fuel and the damage it causes.

But as you may already know, Senator Inhofe has championed opposition  to renewable energy company subsidies while fighting for continues subsidies to oil companies.

                                                                                    ----Gus Gribbin

>         Doyle Rice’s USA Today article appeared on March 18, 2013.

Visit America's Past--Be Shocked and Amazed


            On a recent spring day, chattering youngsters ran helter-skelter over ground Captain John Smith trod some 400 years ago. The kids were likely having more fun than Smith and his fellow colonists ever did.

            The children frolicked at what’s now called “Historic Jamestown” where—on May 13, 1607—104 men and boys established a fort and planted the first viable English colony in the New World.

Some 400 newcomers soon joined that cluster of pioneers. They experienced dreadful hardship. Crops failed, Indians attacked, and the colonists began starving. They grew so desperate that some dug up and ate their dead neighbors’ bodies. Between 1609 and 1610 all but 60 died.

Startling, alarming Jamestown is one of three pivotal historical sites on Virginia’s coast. The other two are Williamsburg and Yorktown.

For those who might not recall and those who have not visited those sites even once, a brief explanation:

 Yorktown Battlefield is where colonial troops forced the surrender of England’s supposedly invincible forces in the Revolutionary War.  The American victory dealt the blow that finally forced caused England to grant the colonies their independence.

Colonial Williamsburg is the famous and popular restored eighteenth century city where, along with others, America’s first and third U.S. presidents plotted rebellion against England. Actors stage mini dramas in the old town’s sandy streets. The place exudes eighteenth century colonial culture.

Jamestown is actually two distinct sites in the same park-like setting: “Historic Jamestown” and “Jamestown Settlement.”

Like Williamsburg, “Jamestown Settlement,” provides “living history” exhibits, costumed guides, and craft shows.  Each site offers entertaining films, recorded narratives and dioramas showing how events there fit into America’s story.

Historic Jamestown, though, is the history buff’s and archeologist’s delight. Visitors can see archeologists and their volunteers at work.

Rugged palisades show where the colonists’ initial fort stood. Crosses mark graves, and a lodge made of poles depicts the first colonists’ dormitory.

Historic Jamestown hammers home the reality and challenges facing the pioneer colonists. It also reveals to the unsuspecting the barbarity those Englishmen imported.

There is evidence, for instance, that at least one lawbreaker had been drawn and quartered, meaning he was tied to a horse and dragged to the execution site. He was then hanged until almost dead, and, while alive, cut open so the executioner could pull out his internal organs. Finally, horses were tied to each limp and the victim’s body was pulled apart.

Unlike the pious Pilgrims who settled Massachusetts to escape religious persecution, the Jamestown settlers were part of a business venture. They invaded the Indians’ domain and ultimately reaped vengeance.

Historic Jamestown presents a complex, often surprising but realistic tale of perseverance and greed that eventually mutated into the hard but genteel southern civilization neighboring Williamsburg exhibits.

The place shows that, whatever else you might say, America’s start was dramatic—and amazing.

                                                                        ----Gus Gribbin

 

.